6 ms·

TSA Threatens Blogger Who Posted New Screening Directive

99 points by phsr 17y ago

ig1 17y ago
WikiLeaks which provides anonymous leaking services for things just like this has recently stopped due to lack of funding (and this document would likely have been leaked there if it hadn't been stopped). Please consider donating to them (they need both money and technical services/expertise) at http://wikileaks.org/ http://wikileaks.org/ to help them carry on if you'd like to support the freedom to whistleblow.
- petewarden 17y ago
  I hadn't realized they were struggling, they've been responsible for some amazing scoops. I thought it was worth calling out this appeal for volunteers as a new item: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1023663 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1023663
- jhancock 17y ago
  Any info as to if donating to wikileaks could put you at risk?
jonknee 17y ago
It's time for the TSA to go.
- blahedo 17y ago
  And be replaced with what? I'm as irritated with all the stupid TSA crap as anyone else and now go out of my way to avoid flying because of it---but the post-9/11 pre-TSA period was even worse as far as fickleness and inconsistency of security. TSA needs a lot of fixing. But on the whole I think nationalised airline security is probably the right way to go.
  - philk 17y ago
    Two things: 1) Reinforced cockpit doors and armed pilots so terrorists can't get control over the plane. 2) Better intelligence and policing on the ground; remember, in the last attempted attack the guys father had raised concerns about him beforehand. Airport screening is basically security theater.
    - Retric 17y ago
      Some airport screening is necessary otherwise you can easily bring significant weaponry on board which makes the reinforced doors and armed pilots fairly useless. However, reinforced doors let you ignore knives etc, which drastically reduce the amount of screening you need to do.
      - randallsquared 17y ago
        Alternatively, use the screening expenses to subsidize ticket discounts for (qualified) citizens willing to bring their personal carry piece on board with safety rounds supplied. :)
    - makecheck 17y ago
      Arming someone isn't necessarily a benefit. If you can hold a deadly weapon, you can also lose that weapon in a fight, at which point the weapon may be used against you. Especially if you're sitting down in a tiny cockpit when someone bursts in. If you'd arm anyone at all, you'd want to be sure they are very well trained (e.g. a police officer, infantryman or equivalent) and in a better position to help.
      - bullseye 17y ago
        >>you'd want to be sure they are very well trained I doubt they would just issue a firearm along with the uniforms. Many airline pilots are ex-military and quite capable of using a sidearm. Training/restrictions would certainly be available for those that aren't.
      - philk 17y ago
- jrockway 17y ago
  It's time for there to be a clear law protecting these journalists from malicious government agencies like the TSA. Apparently, "Congress shall make no law abridging the ... freedom of the press" is not clear enough.
Locke1689 17y ago
Flagged. This one seems straight from the submission guidelines: Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
- jonknee 17y ago
  I find it very relative hacker news and this isn't a story that will be covered on TV news. This is behind the scenes and is about how the internet is completely disrupting the control of information by governments.
  - Locke1689 17y ago
    Hmmm, maybe. However, I could definitely see TSA harassment as something be covered on TV news. I mostly saw this from the political/legal angle which is rather trite and has been covered many times before. This is behind the scenes and is about how the internet is completely disrupting the control of information by governments. I didn't think of this at first but you may be right. Although, I would have preferred an analysis from that perspective in this case, rather than a reporting of the legal circumstances.
- anigbrowl 17y ago
  I think a question of whether bloggers enjoy journalistic privileges or not is a leading indicator of how things will go for new media where journalists aren't necessarily under the wing of a large publisher with an experienced legal department. To me this is the same sort of issue as an exploit advisory.
- ironkeith 17y ago
  While we're being sticklers for the guidelines... If you flag something, please don't also comment that you did.
NathanKP 17y ago
The story according to the two bloggers: http://www.elliott.org/blog/full-text-of-my-subpoena-from-the-department-of-homeland-security/#more-10228 http://www.elliott.org/blog/full-text-of-my-subpoena-from-th... http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2009/12/30/the-fallout-from-sd-1544-09-06-the-feds-at-my-door/ http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2009/12/30/the-...
ghshephard 17y ago
I'm wondering if there are any of us who would suggest that right after a terrorist attack, it might be a good idea _not_ to share with the bad guys how we're going to stop them? I mean, maybe hold off for a week or so while we figure out if: A) There are more attacks coming. B) How we are going to stop them.
- rdtsc 17y ago
  You are assuming that what TSA was doing, is doing and is planning to do stopped/is stopping/will stop terrorist attacks. Their track record is so horrible that they should be fired on the spot, be asked to apologize to everyone they harassed over the years and be forced to return tax payer's money they wasted for expensive x-ray vision and air puffing machines. To bring back an analogy I made in a previous post, they are like the witch doctor that is trying to cure cancer with a rattle or a voodoo doll. The patients keep dying so as far as they can see, the rattle is not advanced enough. Now they've enhanced the rattle with more bells and added more rules that patients have to follow to get cured. Of course, those who see through the farce and write about it, get some personal attention and home visits...
  - robotrout 17y ago
    Wow, that's a lot of vitriol and indignation, considering their record is actually perfect. Did they get lucky a few times to keep that perfect record? Sure they did. But you can't know what would have happened if they hadn't been there. The air puffing machines were a pretty ambitious project, carried out in the haste that comes from knowing that every day you delay may be the day that a preventable tragedy occurs. It's easy to make bad decisions in such a situation. To be able to do chemical analysis, in the field, sampling completely uncontrolled inputs, all completely automated with no chemical analysis expert on-hand to vet the results, and the expectation of no false positives to inconvenience anybody. Seems like you could cut them a little slack. As for the "x-ray vision", as you call it. That seems to work great. It's hampered by public body modesty taboos because it works too well. Anyway, I'm surprised at your level of angst over this.
    - 17y ago
patio11 17y ago
I'm sort of a staunch law & order kind of guy, but this is why you never talk to the police. If they want to talk to you, they can have ample opportunity to do so in your lawyer's offices, in a comfortable plush chair, right into the tape recorder, after giving you blanket immunity for anything resulting from what you are about to tell them. I will also happily let the authorities image my hard drive if they can convince a judge to issue a search warrant for the entire thing. It isn't that I don't trust you, officer, it is just that I desire to renew our traditional understanding that my papers and effects are mine and not to be trifled with lightly.
- stevoski 17y ago
  But if the TSA turn up at your door, claiming they'll put you on the no-fly list if you don't co-operate? Once on the no-fly list, it's close to impossible to get off the list. It's a government agency with far too much power and no transparency.
  - jrockway 17y ago
    Once on the no-fly list, it's close to impossible to get off the list. Sure, if you don't want to change your name. Go to your local courthouse, change the spelling of your name, get a new ID, you're off the list. That's why the no-fly list is such a joke. Also, you can bet that they would not make this threat in the company of your lawyer. This is just a scare tactic.
- jhancock 17y ago
  From personal experience, your position, in many U.S. locales, would most likely be poorly received by a police officer. For example, if you are in your car, they can simply arrest you (no charges, but can hold you for 72 hours) and then fully search your person and vehicle and use whatever they find, probable cause be damned. There are many not well understood and not well court tested Federal rules that can be used against you in much the same way. I highly recommend when dealing with law enforcement to not use a phrase like "my papers and effects are mine and not to be trifled with lightly". You may get away with this with a senior government official but less likely with a run of the mill police officer.
ciscoriordan 17y ago
My favorite quote: "Frischling said [the TSA agents] had to go to WalMart to buy a hard drive, but when they returned were unable to get it to work."
- jrockway 17y ago
  An unexpected fringe benefit of owning 2TB drives: the cops can't buy them at WalMart.
jrockway 17y ago
This is why all of my disks are encrypted. Power turns off, data is gone. If someone shows up at your door threatening you to provide them with a disk image, you can happily comply. When they realize the data is useless without the Constitutionally-protected secret key that only exists in your mind, they will have to file charges, and get a judge to order you to testify against yourself. And right about then, the investigation stops, because you committed no crime, and the order to testify against yourself is illegal. (If anything, it means you have plenty of time to talk to your attorney. They are not getting the data any other way, so you have the power to say, "wait, let me get my lawyer first", even if they physically seize your hardware.) I also have a few drives in my house that look like LUKS encrypted disks, but are actually a LUKS header with random data following it. There is no way I could ever decrypt these disks, as there is no data on them; just random bits. Anyway, you can tell that this was never a real criminal investigation, because a real investigator would get Gmail records from Google, not from some random guy with a laptop. This was purely to scare the blogger into not publishing information about the TSA anymore. "Chilling effect."
- FahnRobier 17y ago
  This post reminds me of a certain xkcd comic: http://xkcd.com/538/ http://xkcd.com/538/ The difference being that wrenches purchased by the TSA probably cost $600. ;) Well, maybe not but it's fun to say: http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1298/120798t1.htm http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1298/120798t1.htm
- defied 17y ago
  What would you suggest for disk encryption? I was looking into PGP and Truecrypt for Mac OS X, but not sure if there are better alternatives?
- khafra 17y ago
  Your fake encrypted disks are so that you can't be forced to decrypt every disk, even under thermorectal cryptanalysis? Did you do that after reading about pre-commitment in game theory, and do you have a plan to avoid the flaw in pre-commitment strategies under asymmetric information exposed in Dr. Strangelove?
flatline 17y ago
There's the difference between Joe-blogger and someone who's an actual journalist. Granted, I don't know that "writes a column for the Washington Post" is exactly hard-hitting journalism, but I find it interesting that he did not turn over any information on his source whereas the guy who was just a blogger complied.
- jrockway 17y ago
  Presumably, the Washington Post has lawyers that deal with this sort of thing, and they have a newspaper that can publish all the details to a wide readership. The Post journalist presumably took some journalism courses, where they probably teach you to not talk to the police in these circumstances. The blogger probably had none of those, and just wanted to take care of his kids that night.
nfnaaron 17y ago
Wait, the TSA has their own subpoena-serving law enforcement agents? I wonder if they instead used the FBI, if those agents might have been able to get an external hard drive to work?

99 points by phsr 17y ago

ig1 17y ago

WikiLeaks which provides anonymous leaking services for things just like this has recently stopped due to lack of funding (and this document would likely have been leaked there if it hadn't been stopped). Please consider donating to them (they need both money and technical services/expertise) at http://wikileaks.org/ http://wikileaks.org/ to help them carry on if you'd like to support the freedom to whistleblow.

petewarden 17y ago
I hadn't realized they were struggling, they've been responsible for some amazing scoops. I thought it was worth calling out this appeal for volunteers as a new item: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1023663 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1023663
jhancock 17y ago
Any info as to if donating to wikileaks could put you at risk?

jonknee 17y ago

It's time for the TSA to go.

blahedo 17y ago
And be replaced with what? I'm as irritated with all the stupid TSA crap as anyone else and now go out of my way to avoid flying because of it---but the post-9/11 pre-TSA period was even worse as far as fickleness and inconsistency of security. TSA needs a lot of fixing. But on the whole I think nationalised airline security is probably the right way to go.
- philk 17y ago
  Two things: 1) Reinforced cockpit doors and armed pilots so terrorists can't get control over the plane. 2) Better intelligence and policing on the ground; remember, in the last attempted attack the guys father had raised concerns about him beforehand. Airport screening is basically security theater.
  - Retric 17y ago
    Some airport screening is necessary otherwise you can easily bring significant weaponry on board which makes the reinforced doors and armed pilots fairly useless. However, reinforced doors let you ignore knives etc, which drastically reduce the amount of screening you need to do.
    - randallsquared 17y ago
      Alternatively, use the screening expenses to subsidize ticket discounts for (qualified) citizens willing to bring their personal carry piece on board with safety rounds supplied. :)
  - makecheck 17y ago
    Arming someone isn't necessarily a benefit. If you can hold a deadly weapon, you can also lose that weapon in a fight, at which point the weapon may be used against you. Especially if you're sitting down in a tiny cockpit when someone bursts in. If you'd arm anyone at all, you'd want to be sure they are very well trained (e.g. a police officer, infantryman or equivalent) and in a better position to help.
    - bullseye 17y ago
      >>you'd want to be sure they are very well trained I doubt they would just issue a firearm along with the uniforms. Many airline pilots are ex-military and quite capable of using a sidearm. Training/restrictions would certainly be available for those that aren't.
    - philk 17y ago
jrockway 17y ago
It's time for there to be a clear law protecting these journalists from malicious government agencies like the TSA. Apparently, "Congress shall make no law abridging the ... freedom of the press" is not clear enough.

Locke1689 17y ago

Flagged. This one seems straight from the submission guidelines: Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.

jonknee 17y ago
I find it very relative hacker news and this isn't a story that will be covered on TV news. This is behind the scenes and is about how the internet is completely disrupting the control of information by governments.
- Locke1689 17y ago
  Hmmm, maybe. However, I could definitely see TSA harassment as something be covered on TV news. I mostly saw this from the political/legal angle which is rather trite and has been covered many times before. This is behind the scenes and is about how the internet is completely disrupting the control of information by governments. I didn't think of this at first but you may be right. Although, I would have preferred an analysis from that perspective in this case, rather than a reporting of the legal circumstances.
anigbrowl 17y ago
I think a question of whether bloggers enjoy journalistic privileges or not is a leading indicator of how things will go for new media where journalists aren't necessarily under the wing of a large publisher with an experienced legal department. To me this is the same sort of issue as an exploit advisory.
ironkeith 17y ago
While we're being sticklers for the guidelines... If you flag something, please don't also comment that you did.

NathanKP 17y ago

The story according to the two bloggers: http://www.elliott.org/blog/full-text-of-my-subpoena-from-the-department-of-homeland-security/#more-10228 http://www.elliott.org/blog/full-text-of-my-subpoena-from-th... http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2009/12/30/the-fallout-from-sd-1544-09-06-the-feds-at-my-door/ http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2009/12/30/the-...

ghshephard 17y ago

I'm wondering if there are any of us who would suggest that right after a terrorist attack, it might be a good idea _not_ to share with the bad guys how we're going to stop them? I mean, maybe hold off for a week or so while we figure out if: A) There are more attacks coming. B) How we are going to stop them.

rdtsc 17y ago
You are assuming that what TSA was doing, is doing and is planning to do stopped/is stopping/will stop terrorist attacks. Their track record is so horrible that they should be fired on the spot, be asked to apologize to everyone they harassed over the years and be forced to return tax payer's money they wasted for expensive x-ray vision and air puffing machines. To bring back an analogy I made in a previous post, they are like the witch doctor that is trying to cure cancer with a rattle or a voodoo doll. The patients keep dying so as far as they can see, the rattle is not advanced enough. Now they've enhanced the rattle with more bells and added more rules that patients have to follow to get cured. Of course, those who see through the farce and write about it, get some personal attention and home visits...
- robotrout 17y ago
  Wow, that's a lot of vitriol and indignation, considering their record is actually perfect. Did they get lucky a few times to keep that perfect record? Sure they did. But you can't know what would have happened if they hadn't been there. The air puffing machines were a pretty ambitious project, carried out in the haste that comes from knowing that every day you delay may be the day that a preventable tragedy occurs. It's easy to make bad decisions in such a situation. To be able to do chemical analysis, in the field, sampling completely uncontrolled inputs, all completely automated with no chemical analysis expert on-hand to vet the results, and the expectation of no false positives to inconvenience anybody. Seems like you could cut them a little slack. As for the "x-ray vision", as you call it. That seems to work great. It's hampered by public body modesty taboos because it works too well. Anyway, I'm surprised at your level of angst over this.
  - 17y ago

patio11 17y ago

I'm sort of a staunch law & order kind of guy, but this is why you never talk to the police. If they want to talk to you, they can have ample opportunity to do so in your lawyer's offices, in a comfortable plush chair, right into the tape recorder, after giving you blanket immunity for anything resulting from what you are about to tell them. I will also happily let the authorities image my hard drive if they can convince a judge to issue a search warrant for the entire thing. It isn't that I don't trust you, officer, it is just that I desire to renew our traditional understanding that my papers and effects are mine and not to be trifled with lightly.

stevoski 17y ago
But if the TSA turn up at your door, claiming they'll put you on the no-fly list if you don't co-operate? Once on the no-fly list, it's close to impossible to get off the list. It's a government agency with far too much power and no transparency.
- jrockway 17y ago
  Once on the no-fly list, it's close to impossible to get off the list. Sure, if you don't want to change your name. Go to your local courthouse, change the spelling of your name, get a new ID, you're off the list. That's why the no-fly list is such a joke. Also, you can bet that they would not make this threat in the company of your lawyer. This is just a scare tactic.
jhancock 17y ago
From personal experience, your position, in many U.S. locales, would most likely be poorly received by a police officer. For example, if you are in your car, they can simply arrest you (no charges, but can hold you for 72 hours) and then fully search your person and vehicle and use whatever they find, probable cause be damned. There are many not well understood and not well court tested Federal rules that can be used against you in much the same way. I highly recommend when dealing with law enforcement to not use a phrase like "my papers and effects are mine and not to be trifled with lightly". You may get away with this with a senior government official but less likely with a run of the mill police officer.

ciscoriordan 17y ago

My favorite quote: "Frischling said [the TSA agents] had to go to WalMart to buy a hard drive, but when they returned were unable to get it to work."

jrockway 17y ago
An unexpected fringe benefit of owning 2TB drives: the cops can't buy them at WalMart.

jrockway 17y ago

This is why all of my disks are encrypted. Power turns off, data is gone. If someone shows up at your door threatening you to provide them with a disk image, you can happily comply. When they realize the data is useless without the Constitutionally-protected secret key that only exists in your mind, they will have to file charges, and get a judge to order you to testify against yourself. And right about then, the investigation stops, because you committed no crime, and the order to testify against yourself is illegal. (If anything, it means you have plenty of time to talk to your attorney. They are not getting the data any other way, so you have the power to say, "wait, let me get my lawyer first", even if they physically seize your hardware.) I also have a few drives in my house that look like LUKS encrypted disks, but are actually a LUKS header with random data following it. There is no way I could ever decrypt these disks, as there is no data on them; just random bits. Anyway, you can tell that this was never a real criminal investigation, because a real investigator would get Gmail records from Google, not from some random guy with a laptop. This was purely to scare the blogger into not publishing information about the TSA anymore. "Chilling effect."

FahnRobier 17y ago
This post reminds me of a certain xkcd comic: http://xkcd.com/538/ http://xkcd.com/538/ The difference being that wrenches purchased by the TSA probably cost $600. ;) Well, maybe not but it's fun to say: http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1298/120798t1.htm http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1298/120798t1.htm
defied 17y ago
What would you suggest for disk encryption? I was looking into PGP and Truecrypt for Mac OS X, but not sure if there are better alternatives?
khafra 17y ago
Your fake encrypted disks are so that you can't be forced to decrypt every disk, even under thermorectal cryptanalysis? Did you do that after reading about pre-commitment in game theory, and do you have a plan to avoid the flaw in pre-commitment strategies under asymmetric information exposed in Dr. Strangelove?

flatline 17y ago

There's the difference between Joe-blogger and someone who's an actual journalist. Granted, I don't know that "writes a column for the Washington Post" is exactly hard-hitting journalism, but I find it interesting that he did not turn over any information on his source whereas the guy who was just a blogger complied.

jrockway 17y ago
Presumably, the Washington Post has lawyers that deal with this sort of thing, and they have a newspaper that can publish all the details to a wide readership. The Post journalist presumably took some journalism courses, where they probably teach you to not talk to the police in these circumstances. The blogger probably had none of those, and just wanted to take care of his kids that night.

nfnaaron 17y ago

Wait, the TSA has their own subpoena-serving law enforcement agents? I wonder if they instead used the FBI, if those agents might have been able to get an external hard drive to work?